Thursday, January 12, 2006

My Most Successful SEM Campaign Ever

I've been running a campaign on Google AdWords for ten days now, whose goal is to inform the largest amount of people possible that global warming is the biggest environment fraud of all time.

If you're interested do a search on Google for 'global warming', 'global warming research', or 'causes of global warming' and look for one of these ads:

Global Warming The Biggest Environmental Fraud Of All Time www.globalwarming.org

Global Warming It Doesn't Exist. Never Has. Dare To Learn The Truth www.globalwarming.org

10 Global Warming Myths The Biggest Environmental Fraud Of All Time, Debunked www.friendsofscience.org

I started the campaign after reading (get ready, this is deep) Michael Crighton's latest novel, 'State Of Fear', in which he weaves into his story enough factual data to produce the desired effect of getting the already skeptical silent majority of readers to realize that global warming is a big, fat hoax.

Yes, that's right - global warming is a fraud. If you're willing to suspend disbelief for a second, consider the following:

1) Most scientists do not believe human activities threaten to disrupt the Earth's climate. 2) The most reliable temperature data show no global warming trend. 3) Global computer models are too crude to predict future climate changes. 4) The IPCC did not prove that human activities are causing global warming. 5) A modest amount of global warming, should it occur, would be beneficial to the natural world and to human civilization. 6) Quickly reducing our greenhouse gas emissions would be costly and would not stop global warming. 7) The best strategy to pursue is one of "no regrets." [I say this on global warming, but a "no regrets" CO2 policy would be equally beneficial to deforestation]

If the topic is of interest to you, go here, here and here, and let me know if you agree or disagree; either way I'll still love you.

Over ten days I've had

123,474 impressions, 4,805 clicks = 3.8% CTR on search279,481 impressions, 1,744 clicks = 0.6% CTR on contentMy average position started at 5.5 and finished at 3.5, and average CPC was ~$0.08.

I need to find a very weathly person who cares as much as I do about certain public policy issues, and who wants to free as many minds as possible from the liberal trap American media has become. Anyone know anyone who fits the bill? I'm dead serious.

In all seriousness, though, I find it fascinating what one can do with AdWords in the domain of public policy, politics and even foreign relations. It's clear that right now it's really only the Democrats and more liberal organizations that are taking advantage of paid search, and I certainly hope that changes.

10 Comments:

You should move to new orleans, florida or alaska. Or go ask frenchies, britains or people of new delhi last week with temperatuve above zero. Or simply travel outside US and get some news outside your commercial firewall as Fox and CNN !

Extreme weather is *not* a proof of global warming, any more than high tides are a proof of rising sea levels. If you actually look at the historical record of severe weather, you'll clearly see that a) periodic extreme weather has always been a core element of nature's way; andb) the so-called extreme weather we see in parts of the world today is no more extreme than similar events in the past & prior to the industrial revolution.

The reason I've undertaken the global warming re-education ppc campaign is precisely because of the half-baked arguments that have been taught to millions and millions of people worldwide.

Don't get me wrong - I started out a true global warming believer myself in college and used the same unscientific arguments that the environmental movement uses today. I have just enough science under my belt, however, to realize the truth when I see it.

I challenge you to actually investigate the sites my ads land on, and bring an open mind to your investigation.

>... because of the half-baked arguments that have been taught to millions and millions of people worldwide.

Yes you have the truth and all the scientifics of 150 other countries who agreeing to undertake formal talks on mandatory reductions in greenhouse gases beyond the current 2012 “end date” for the Kyoto Protocol are surely all wrong.

That there is a scientific consensus on the existence of human-caused global warming is more a product of the liberal media and academic world than anything else.

Frederick Seitz, the past president of the National Academy of Sciences and president emeritus of Rockefeller University, circulated a document in 1998, the “Oregon Petition,” which gathered more than 17,000 names from scientists in various fields. According to Seitz, “This [Kyoto] treaty is, in our opinion, based upon flawed ideas.”

If you care to educate yourself, read 'Free Market Environmentalism' by Anderson & Leal, who argue convincingly that govt management of environmental resources has a piss-poor track record almost everywhere it's ever been applied.

Oh, and one more thing - the world temperature data Crighton cited in his novel were from the Goddard Institute for Space Studies. Quoting from his Appendix II: "Shortly after the hardcover publication of this book, GISS changed its website to show less data. The station data no longer goes back before 1880, and thus heightens the appearance of a steady rise in temperate."

How's that for biased science?

***I challenge you to put forth evidence of global warming that I cannot convincingly refute.***

> According to Seitz, “This [Kyoto] >treaty is, in our opinion, based upon >flawed ideas.”

that does not mean global warming is flawed, just the political plan around it.

>Shortly after the hardcover >publication of this book, GISS >changed its website to show less >data.

similarly, that does not dispute global warming.

i challenge you to find several serious accepted scientific research papers/projects/reports that dispute the absolute factual reality of global warming. i dont think they exist. there is 0% disputed reality of global warming in the scientific community. unless your research is sponsored by Shell. but feel free to poke flawed holes in random reports if you want.

Perhaps I should have been clearer in my post: I don't dispute that there's scientific consensus around the idea that the earth's atmospheric temperature is increasing. What I dispute is the notion that there's *any* conclusive evidence that this global warming has been caused by humans.

Say there's a 90% chance you're right and human-caused global warming is not happening. But that still leaves a 10% chance that civilization will be devastated over the coming decades, and there's something we could do to stop it. Isn't it worth doing something now to have a 10% chance of making life immeasurably better for our grandchildren, and their grandchildren, and their grandchildren?

I for one would rather take a 10% chance of saving civilization for the generations to come and a 90% chance of having wasted some money, than take a 10% chance of dooming the planet and humanity.

Regardless of your beliefs or the beliefs of some of your readers, I don't think your metrics are ideal for measuring a successful SEM campaign. CTR is only a measure of how much money you give Google, not how successful the campaign is. You need to look at the actions of the visitor after they clicked on the ad. Did they convert as a lead or a sale? Did they land on the page and immediately hit the back button? How do you know if the clicks you got were people who's minds were convinced by your site's arguments, or simply people who got interested by the ad and wanted to see what you had to say?

I'm in the process of launching a blog that will go into a lot of details like this, along with some other little known SEM tricks, which you can find at http://www.serpzone.com. Feel free to drop me a line if you would like help digging deeper into the metrics that you have.